The US military does not like the radar "Voronezh"

November 7, 2013 238

The US military regarded missile defense radar in Armavir as destabilizing the balance of strategic forces.

The Pentagon expressed concern about the actions of Moscow in the field of missile defense. On the one hand, it calls on the United States to disarm, and on the other, it is actively strengthening its borders with anti-missile systems, The Washington Free Beacon writes. Official representatives of the US armed forces declared that the new radar station (radar) of the missile defense system (PRO) in Armavir increases the total number of Russian missile defense systems and poses a threat to the security of America and Europe.

"The Russians do not agree with the deployment of US anti-missile systems installed in Europe, but at the same time they themselves create a network of means for detecting a rocket attack," the publication quotes official publications from the United States.

The US military is also concerned about the creation of the Russian PC-24 “Yars” rocket, which was tested in September of this year. In their opinion, the test results speak of it as a medium-range missile. This violates the agreement between the USSR and the USA on 1987 on the elimination of such missiles. However, the Russian side claims that the range of the Yars (more than 5500 km) exceeds that of medium-range missiles and cannot be considered as a breach of contract.

The discontent of the US military is exacerbated by the statement of Barack Obama to reduce the offensive arsenal in the framework of agreements with Russia. He stated this in September in Berlin. Earlier, the US leadership abandoned the fourth phase of creating missile defense in Europe. According to US Deputy Secretary of Defense Alexander Vershbow, the savings will be directed, in particular, to improve the accuracy parameters of the interceptor missiles that will go into service with American bases in Poland and Romania.

I want to answer ...

For all these “concerns” I can ask only one simple question - is it possible for you, but can't we? Since when thinking about our security, we should consult with foreign "partners"? Moreover, with those who sleep and see a picture of the encirclement of the new Russian military bases, as in the good old days of the Cold War.

And not Russia is the first in the anti-missile disputes began to build up "muscles". In the end, we did not initiate US actions to create a European missile defense system, which is supposedly intended to neutralize the missile threat from "rogue states". We did not push the “older brother” to twist the hands of the younger brothers in the NATO bloc, that is, their partners, in order to get them to agree to such actions. And you can ask a lot of such obvious questions to which objective answers will not be in your favor, gentlemen.

Therefore, dear ones, it’s better not to express your “concerns”, but rather look for consensus with us on these issues. So said in his time the first and last president of the USSR, the unforgettable Mikhail Sergeyevich Gorbachev.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

mountain

+2

7 November 2013 20: 43

And we like what you don’t like.)))))
Ivanovich47

+3

7 November 2013 20: 46

The American “concerned” Pentagon officials “forgot” that they broke the missile defense treaty with Russia. Now they screamed - Guard! These gentlemen have neither shame nor conscience. They surround Russia with a palisade of anti-missile defenses, and they themselves are thinking of sitting out overseas. It won't work, gentlemen Yankees. We'll get it, guaranteed!
1. Rif
  
  +1
  
  7 November 2013 21: 33
  
  These are the military, so to speak, they are the smartest in America among all the amers, but the agreement was torn up by the boys from the State Department, but they didn’t tell the smart ones.
kundyshev

+1

7 November 2013 20: 51

[i]...maybe we should give them a piece of paper where it will be written that this is not against Amer’s missiles?[i][/i]

Judging by their reaction, they now need a PAPER not with a message, but... just softer...
Enot-poloskun

+3

7 November 2013 21: 07

This is what the Americans drank before making such profound conclusions:
1. The comment was deleted.
2. The comment was deleted.
Rif

0

7 November 2013 21: 28

If they don’t like it, then let’s take the right course, comrades!
f4b2

+2

7 November 2013 21: 37

Yes, we don’t seem to object to the US missile defense system.
Under one condition - all missile defense elements are located on US territory.
It's simple.

And further. Guys. Again a substitution of concepts.

There is no AMERICAN military. For, for example, the Mexican and Venezuelan military - they are also in America, aren’t they?
US, US Military, o...e. But not American.
They have not yet conquered these continents entirely.

This, by the way, is all also a serious part of the ideological war -
substitution of like simple concepts.

Such small steps in a vile game.

From the same series, a sickening concept - Russians (propagandist - Boris Yeltsin, author unknown :)). Well, what a term, huh?
Мы
RUSSIANS,
because - in Russia!!!
And everything else is from the evil one, my word.

P.S. Fix the Americans, please!
akm8226

0

7 November 2013 21: 41

The main thing is that we like this station. Everyone else can walk.))
soldier's grandson

+2

7 November 2013 21: 51

The Nazis didn’t like the Katyusha, but the Voronezh radar, so how can you please everyone?
rrrd

0

7 November 2013 22: 19

Well, this is actually impudent!!! I have no words, or rather I have, but I can’t write here...
crambol

0

7 November 2013 22: 30

Quote: Mithridates
...either the Americans are really stupid, or they are acting like fools by declaring concerns about radar stations on Russian territory.

They are not stupid, they think we are stupid!
The comment was deleted.
1c12Valeriy

-3

7 November 2013 22: 50

And my personal opinion is that radars of this type have no practical use, just another budget cut, and that’s all. The point is that the AWACS detects the very fact of launch, and already on a ballistic trajectory, when it is in principle impossible to take any response actions .In our time, reconnaissance is relevant, starting from loading products on board a nuclear submarine, finding out its route and combat mission, radio and telecode communication codes, the political situation, and finally. And from a technical point of view, the most effective in this regard is space reconnaissance, the capabilities of which are not discussed by either the United States or Russia.
1c12Valeriy

-1

7 November 2013 22: 50

And my personal opinion is that radars of this type have no practical use, just another budget cut, and that’s all. The point is that the AWACS detects the very fact of launch, and already on a ballistic trajectory, when it is in principle impossible to take any response actions .In our time, reconnaissance is relevant, starting from loading products on board a nuclear submarine, finding out its route and combat mission, radio and telecode communication codes, the political situation, and finally. And from a technical point of view, the most effective in this regard is space reconnaissance, the capabilities of which are not discussed by either the United States or Russia.
1. Tiamat2702
  
  +3
  
  8 November 2013 12: 31
  
  Believe me, if there were no practical benefits, the Americans would not have expressed concern (well, they didn’t object to the form from Yudashkin).
their

0

7 November 2013 22: 51

The Americans are indignant and this is good, Russian radars did not allow Israel to unleash a third world war. In fact, it’s scary to imagine the shock that Israel and the Pentagon experienced when they learned how far away the Russians could spy.
flint1309

0

7 November 2013 23: 00

Quote: Jin
Ha ha! It's not funny (((What, for f * mnya, mlyn ?! We, then, are creating a radar, and their "anti-missile means" mean the basing of missiles together with a radar ... it somehow does not count or "fell asleep" this moment?

Damn, I’ll add WHAT THE HOWLING WOULD BE, if only we had installed anti-missile defenses in Mexico!!!
flint1309

0

7 November 2013 23: 00

Quote: Jin
Ha ha! It's not funny (((What, for f * mnya, mlyn ?! We, then, are creating a radar, and their "anti-missile means" mean the basing of missiles together with a radar ... it somehow does not count or "fell asleep" this moment?

Damn, I’ll add WHAT THE HOWLING WOULD BE, if only we had installed anti-missile defenses in Mexico!!!
sillsas

0

7 November 2013 23: 21

Are we pumping gas and oil to potential enemies? They want everything for free!
Semen Semyonitch

+1

7 November 2013 23: 27

And what next? We also don’t like a lot of things...The carrier fleet, for example...Bases all over the world...Prying your nose where the consensus dog doesn’t stick...
ochakow703

0

7 November 2013 23: 29

Here is another confirmation of the correctness of Zadornov’s words “Well, the Americans, well, are stupid!!!” I'm with a proposal. Let's say from the government, kick out a dozen of any officials (nothing will change), and in their place appoint a person who would respond in the same coin to every official nasty thing on the part of the Americans. Well done to VVP with his instructive article in Amer’s newspaper, we need it more often, and more salty! And more moral teachings, like for schoolchildren.
ochakow703

0

7 November 2013 23: 31

Here is another confirmation of the correctness of Zadornov’s words “Well, the Americans, well, are stupid!!!” I'm with a proposal. Let's say from the government, kick out a dozen of any officials (nothing will change), and in their place appoint a person who would respond in the same coin to every official nasty thing on the part of the Americans. Well done to VVP with his instructive article in Amer’s newspaper, we need it more often, and more salty! And more moral teachings, like for schoolchildren.
Hitrovan07

0

8 November 2013 00: 20

But I like the Americans, they create a crisis themselves - and then act as “peacekeepers”.
They themselves “surrounded” Russia with their bases, missiles and various tracking stations - and when they received an adequate response, they immediately screamed about injustice.
And not a shadow of doubt in their actions, not an ounce of conscience in their speeches.
But... let them continue to bliss out.
PValery53

+1

8 November 2013 01: 52

For the same purpose, the fight against missiles of “rogue countries”, Russia, as “assistance to partners”,
is building a missile defense system in Cuba and Central America. This should cause a “touching tear” among the Americans. Yes, and express “serious concern” about the presence of the US Armed Forces. - It’s a shame, they say, for a self-respecting country to rattle sabers. - This is quite in the style of the American (“brazen Chinese”) statement. Let's respond to demagoguery with demagoguery!
basmach

+1

8 November 2013 02: 07

The deployment of missile defense near our borders had only one goal - the destruction of retaliatory missiles. That is why deployment in Poland from a tactical point of view is the most optimal, allowing control of the vast territory of Russia. By allowing the detection of missile launches from the Mediterranean, the ZGRS allows you to increase the decision-making time and prepare the air defense to repel an attack, but does not allow you to detect and destroy missiles (low-flying-50- 100m high-speed targets with terrain bending in a vertical or horizontal plane) In addition, the flight of the missile system when launched from the Mediterranean will pass near or through the territories of neighboring countries, which increases the likelihood of their detection and destruction of the air defenses of these countries. The most likely option is the launch of the missile launcher from the territories of its adherents - Poland, the Baltic states, as well as the Baltic and North seas. In this case, the time of decision-making (from the moment the launch of the missile launcher is detected until the launch of retaliatory missiles) and the time required to detect and destroy the missile launcher by air defense systems will be reduced to a minimum, which will increase the likelihood of the missile defense system overcoming the air defense systems, their destruction, as well as the destruction of missile systems (or at least some part of them). Together with missile defense systems, this will allow one to avoid a retaliatory strike or reduce it as much as possible. So, rejoice about the launch ZGRS is possible and necessary, but the urgency of the issue remains as before.
Sergey S.

0

8 November 2013 02: 21

Quote: sus
Americans are indignant and that’s good...

To this I will add the saying of the ancients:
“Jupiter, you’re angry, that means you’re wrong!”

But the fact is indicative.
The radar is not even a missile defense launch complex. Just eyes and ears, but it still turns out to be a nail in the ass for the Yankees.
The explanation, apparently, is that Obama’s warriors were up to something that they would like to hide from the world community.

And this is in conditions when at their airports “specialists” (I understand maniacs and pedophiles) examine the bodies of men, women, children and even old men and women...
rpek32

0

8 November 2013 04: 12

The US military does not like the radar "Voronezh"

I like this. Nice piece of iron. And the American military somehow gives a fuck
chij

+1

8 November 2013 04: 29

So it was not built in vain. Good.
patriot2

0

8 November 2013 05: 41

They like theirs, but not ours?!
It’s like seeing if from Washington it’s like this, if through the Voronezh station it’s not like that!
Apologet insane

-1

8 November 2013 06: 44

Hoho, we constantly say that we do not like American missile defense and all-planetary American dominance. So they decided to show us all the absurdity of our “dislikes” =) Just subtle American banter.
SmacXnumx

0

8 November 2013 07: 55

Like it or not - go to sleep, stupid beautiful person!!!!
Last paladin

+2

8 November 2013 08: 01

I am a radio engineer myself, I understand perfectly well the importance of radars, but, excuse me, do the American gentlemen talk about them as if they were missiles?

And it seems to me that there is a big difference between installing “radars” and missiles on the territory of other countries to influence the territory of an opponent and installing radars within your borders to control missiles flying in your direction.
Stasstoychev

+1

8 November 2013 08: 21

The girls dance interestingly - four in a row at once! :-) Since when did “eyes” become equal to “sword”? A radar is not even a “shield”. Are the worried ones okay in their brains?
Evgeniy667b

0

8 November 2013 08: 33

What staffers don’t like is very, very good. But there wouldn’t be any Jews in our fatherland who, to their tune, would destroy what they wanted. As was the case, for example, with Alpha and Typhoon nuclear submarines or missile trains.
Alexxeg73

0

8 November 2013 08: 49

This is not a radar - it is a work of art!
shark

0

8 November 2013 08: 50

There is a golden rule in the worldview of our actions - if the United States is not happy or our liberal public is alarmed, WE DID EVERYTHING RIGHT!
Just

+1

8 November 2013 08: 57

The article misses one nuance, namely - Russia is creating missile defense elements on its territory, and the United States is creating elements near the borders of the most likely enemy. After all, elements of the US missile defense system located in Europe are part of the US army, and not of the countries in which they are located.
Mails

+1

8 November 2013 09: 14

Why CUBA! ) This is a different state.
It is enough to install a new radar in the Far East and preferably in Chukotka. Calculate the radius...)))
In fact, the entire United States will be under cover, and you won’t even need to travel outside your territory!
HAM

0

8 November 2013 09: 40

CONCERNED - DRINK VALERIAN, IT HELPS!
kapitan281271

0

8 November 2013 09: 44

My deputy director always answers all questions the same way and in monosyllables, maybe he’s right and his answer is “YES FUCK THEM.”
Gomunkul

+1

8 November 2013 10: 04

The US military is also concerned about the creation of the Russian PC-24 “Yars” rocket, which was tested in September of this year. In their opinion, the test results speak of it as a medium-range missile. This violates the agreement between the USSR and the USA on 1987 on the elimination of such missiles. However, the Russian side claims that the range of the Yars (more than 5500 km) exceeds that of medium-range missiles and cannot be considered as a breach of contract.
Americans, you signed this agreement with Gorbachev! You can hang him for not fulfilling this agreement!
kartalovkolya

0

8 November 2013 10: 13

Well, absolutely no way...! It’s the robbers and brigands who are concerned about the fact that they can get change at any moment. These minke whales are always coming to us with their concerns, but we don’t care about your worries, we should deal with ours , but we are not going to ask anyone how and with what to defend the country and we will solve this issue ourselves! And you good gentlemen, better take care of your LGBT and gay pride parades. You do it better.
Jurkovs

0

8 November 2013 10: 15

One of our political scientists recently noted that the Americans have destroyed the old political language, and we will now have to develop a new language to communicate with them. A language where any statement means both truth and lie.
1. kaktus
  
  0
  
  10 November 2013 17: 56
  
  It seems that Russian language is understood everywhere?
Yura

0

8 November 2013 10: 47

Since the Americans don’t like our stations, it means we’re heading in the right direction! )))
Jarserge

0

8 November 2013 11: 24

It turns out that our enemies don’t like that this same radar will see something. So we are doing everything right
Jarserge

0

8 November 2013 11: 24

It turns out that our enemies don’t like that this same radar will see something. So we are doing everything right
demon184

0

8 November 2013 11: 49

Venezuela will deploy an air defense system in key areas of the country
Tiamat2702

0

8 November 2013 11: 50

How can I like it when they don’t like us!!!
Muadipus

0

8 November 2013 12: 38

If they grumble, it means we are doing everything right.
A couple more stations wouldn’t hurt, one in Anadyr and the other in Maracaibo (Venezuela).
GBG_Belarus

+1

8 November 2013 13: 48

A-A-A!!! The Russians are setting up stations to track how our missiles will fly towards them. It is not right!!! Reminds me of Goebbels' complaints that the Russians are fighting incorrectly - they are partisans, you see, not in the European way. I wonder if they are really so stupid or if their super arrogance knows no bounds?
Cherdak

0

8 November 2013 14: 39

I propose to put on the Voronezh radar this plot, so beloved by Americans:
Georgic

0

8 November 2013 14: 53

Are they completely imbeciles or what...? This face-to-face manner of theirs makes me sick to my stomach.
Russia will play its own music within its territories!!!
Georgic

0

8 November 2013 15: 46

Are they completely imbeciles or what...? This face-to-face manner of theirs makes me sick to my stomach.
Russia will play its own music within its territories!!!
vlad.svargin

+1

8 November 2013 16: 05

June 12 marks the 11th anniversary of the George W. Bush administration's withdrawal from the ABM Treaty. From 1972 to 2002, the ABM Treaty was seen as the cornerstone of strategic stability. Who was the first to break parity? It was simply not profitable for the United States, and Russia at that time was no longer the USSR in terms of its power; they considered that it was possible to violate the treaty without paying attention to the agreement in the wake of the supposed “victory in the Cold War.” Russia was not perceived as a serious adversary. They brought their bases even closer, moved their missile defense system close to our borders, and were already dreaming of creating an Arctic fleet without asking Russia.
And now, when expressing their claims, they “dream” that Russia itself will surrender and will not dare to strengthen its defense. This is already Anglo-Saxon arrogant arrogance.
vlad.svargin

0

8 November 2013 16: 08

June 12 marked 11 years since the George W. Bush administration withdrew from the ABM Treaty. From 1972 to 2002, the ABM Treaty was seen as the cornerstone of strategic stability. Who was the first to break parity? It was simply not profitable for the United States, and Russia at that time was no longer the USSR in terms of its power; they considered that it was possible to violate the treaty without paying attention to the agreement in the wake of the supposed “victory in the Cold War.” Russia was not perceived as a serious adversary. They brought their bases even closer, moved their missile defense system close to our borders, and were already dreaming of creating an Arctic fleet without asking Russia.
And now, when expressing their claims, they “dream” that Russia itself will surrender and will not dare to strengthen its defense. This is already Anglo-Saxon arrogant arrogance.
1. fif21
  
  0
  
  22 November 2016 09: 31
  
  Quote: vlad.svargin
  and Russia at that time was no longer the USSR in terms of its power, they considered that it was possible to violate the treaty without paying attention to the agreement in the wake of the supposed “victory in the Cold War.” Russia was not perceived as a serious adversary.
  
  We need to thank NATO! With their unwise policies (expansion to the east), they forced Russia to become strong and independent. Otherwise, we would have had mercy on our partners until they stuck a knife in our back There is a Russian proverb: two bears cannot live in one den! But NATO’s desire to transform from Mishka to Mashka leaves hope for a peaceful existence
Technologist

0

8 November 2013 18: 18

Fuck them... the dog barks and the wind carries it away!
Lebedev

+1

8 November 2013 19: 07

This is how Americans need to be tickled more often.
Axis

0

8 November 2013 22: 25

It seems that Americans are constantly smoking something!
We place OUR defenses ON OUR TERRITORY, and not next to them! I would like to see them if we deployed our missile defense systems somewhere in Cuba
Frenzzze

0

8 November 2013 23: 59

Americans, as always, are in their repertoire. They will see a speck in someone else’s eye, but they won’t see a log in their own. I’m waiting for them to break up into states!
wandlitz

0

9 November 2013 20: 33

This fact that they don't like our actions means that we are doing everything right....
GSH-18

0

9 November 2013 21: 06

Article quote: "
The US military is also concerned about the creation of the Russian PC-24 Yars missile, which was tested in September of this year. In their opinion, the test results speak of it as a medium-range missile. And this violates the 1987 agreement between the USSR and the USA on the elimination of such missiles."

In this case, let them shove their tomahawks into their mouths! They also have a range of less than 5500km! And we don't give a fuck. that these are cruise missiles!
GSH-18

0

9 November 2013 21: 15

Quote from the article: "
The US military is also concerned about the creation of the Russian PC-24 Yars missile, which was tested in September of this year. In their opinion, the test results speak of it as a medium-range missile. And this violates the 1987 agreement between the USSR and the USA on the elimination of such missiles."
In this case, let them shove their tomahawks into their mouths! After all, their range is less than 5500 km! And fuck .. these are cruise missiles!

We will ask their opinion when each Yars will accurately deliver the “cargo” to the target American battlefield! In the meantime, let them shove their opinions where they usually shove everything!
mixam

0

9 November 2013 23: 40

The US military is also concerned about the creation of the Russian PC-24 Yars missile, which was tested in September of this year. In their opinion, the test results speak of it as a medium-range missile.
It seems that they were testing not “YARS”, but a new analogue of “Courier”, which, by the way, will also be an ICBM. If anything happens, you won’t be able to find him in the forest at all).
CHAAmvd

+1

10 November 2013 09: 52

It’s a pity Azerbaijan stopped cooperating with us. I wonder what they are going to do with our radar.
att_aw21w

+1

10 November 2013 11: 46

I remember that in Siberia (I think near Krasnoyarsk - I don’t remember exactly) there was a similar radar with a phased antenna in the 80s, which our “democrats” managed “cleverly”!
I wonder if it was restored or not?
Zubr

+2

10 November 2013 17: 43

Quote: Good Ukraine

Quote: Simon
Apparently very good eyes, from which you can’t hide anything. So the Americans are afraid

They did not like these eyes very much after two "fallen" ballistic missiles in the Mediterranean Sea, launched at Syria. And the warlike tone changed to "peaceful chemical initiatives"
Apparently the eyes not only look, but also launch anti-missiles.
VERY GOOD STATIONS.
Here is to put this back in Cuba (to combat pirates) to restore the balance of power.

If we put it in Cuba, then the entire territory of our “PARTNERS” will be in full view. The whole point is different, once upon a time our DARYAL stations could give such a strong electromagnetic pulse that all the electronics were covered... but we didn’t care about lamps. And the new one has a coverage radius of 5000 km. I wonder how many kilowatts she pumps into the air?
Stasi

+1

10 November 2013 17: 46

It is necessary for such stations to create a continuous radar field throughout the entire territory of Russia. Then there will be discontent not only of the Americans but also of the entire NATO. The fact that they are dissatisfied with this radar shows that sneaking up on us unnoticed and launching an air or missile strike with impunity will not work, no “Stealth” will help.
Zubr

+1

10 November 2013 18: 20

Quote: CHAAmvd
It’s a pity Azerbaijan stopped cooperating with us. I wonder what they are going to do with our radar.

As usual, they will take away the color of the meth. Because the east is a delicate matter, why did they get it...)) They won’t be able to turn it in our direction. Well, perhaps they will upset the circuits and play pranks on the Turks, and pollute the Turchaninovskoe television with its former noise...
The comment was deleted.
tnk1969

0

10 November 2013 21: 58

We're all wrong. The Americans are doing the right thing with missile defense from “rogue countries.” They are. And we need to admit it. At the state level. And therefore, draw real conclusions... In order to counteract them, it is necessary to withdraw from the 87 Treaty on Intermediate-Range and Short-Range Missiles and start producing them again and spreading them around the perimeter of Russia’s borders. And tell the Americans and Europe that these missiles are there to protect them from these Outcasts... And also deploy them in Cuba. To protect our allies in the Western Hemisphere.
And yes, we also need to deploy another Voronezh there for space observation. After all, the threat can come not only from “Rogue Countries”, but also from meteorites and any space debris. And to monitor them, tracking stations are needed, and not for America and Europe. So Russia needs to arm itself not from the Amers and their NATO allies, but from the “Outlaws” and then Russia will become not a Menacing Bear, but... a Bear, similar to the Olympic Bear... But with a rocket in his hands...
Everything I wrote is, of course, ironic, but this 87 Treaty is already in the liver. And modern realities require the Russian Federation to withdraw from this Treaty altogether, just as the Americans once abandoned the ABM Treaty....
Sterlya

0

11 November 2013 02: 04

Quote: fzr1000
"Someone is very, very sexually concerned."
In our territory, we want to build what we want, unlike the United States and its footcloths. These pre-imperials already pulled up.

+ I’m already thinking. or they think we are stupid. but such stupidity and arrogance is characteristic only of concerned amers
937.195.71

0

11 November 2013 18: 18

How many times were they told to put away their missiles, but they didn’t put them away, now don’t sleep peacefully, get nervous, distract others
Andron59

0

12 November 2013 17: 35

Swinging a sword at us, they are offended that we are putting up a shield. Is their logic okay?
Jack122

0

14 November 2013 12: 18

"The Russians do not agree with the deployment of US anti-missile systems installed in Europe, but at the same time they themselves create a network of means for detecting a rocket attack," the publication quotes official publications from the United States.
----
Brutes, just arrogant brutes. The fact that the Russians do not agree with the Americans did not in any way prevent them from deploying missile defense elements in Europe and the United States did not make any concessions, but at the same time they accuse Russia of being forced to respond to all this. Their rhetoric infuriates them, it’s time for them to shut up: they didn’t come to an agreement? Fuck you now
doctor.75

0

14 November 2013 13: 59

What are you saying there?! And, although... we don’t care what you say! )))
fif21

0

22 November 2016 09: 12

Tastes could not be discussed. The radar is not directed against NATO! Her goal is to monitor the penguin population in Antarctica!
fif21

0

22 November 2016 09: 53

There lived a Boar in the forest. He guarded his territory and loved 14 wild boars. But the well-fed life in the pigsty did not give him peace. Well, the Boar decided to live in the pigsty. The owner greeted him kindly, but set a condition - to remove the fangs. A boar living in a pigsty cannot get enough of it - they feed, water, scratch behind the ear, it’s warm and dry - not life, but a freebie! But the pigs began to insult, they try to bite and bite, and the owner sharpens his knife and looks at the Boar strangely. The Boar ran away from such a life into the dense forest as soon as its fangs grew a little. And he began to live well and make good. This is the fairy tale I told my grandson before bed yesterday. What did you think
The comment was deleted.
The comment was deleted.
Molot1979

0

29 June 2017 08: 04

Geeks. They are creating in Europe, thousands of kilometers from their territory, and we are on our own land. That's for sure the little people - even if they look at us, they will say - God's dew. How can you negotiate anything with such people?
Cuzownoy

0

20 July 2017 15: 33

I’m so tired of all this verbiage, there are two options for development: either peacefully or not, “to be or not to be,” that is the question.